The Stones who Rolled away

THE STONES are a different kind of group, ex-Rolling Stones ­guitarist Mick Taylor observed recently – with a prize degree of understatement. “I realised that when I joined them,” he says. “It’s not really so much their musical ability it’s just they have a certain kind of style and attitude which is unique.”

With heroin having made life with the band less fun Taylor, 63, quit in 1974 after five years and ex-Faces guitarist Ronnie Wood took over but on Sunday for the first time in 37 years he will once again appear live on stage with The Rolling Stones on the much-anticipated Doom and Gloom world tour. And not only Taylor, whom many aficionados see as the most musically talented member of the group: bassist Bill Wyman, 76, who left in December 1992 (having joined in 1962, the year after the Stones formed), will also be making a guest appearance.

Keith Richards has made it crystal clear that “guest” is very much the watchword. Indeed it was the controlling influence of Richards and outrageous showman Sir Mick Jagger that was one reason Wyman decided to quit two decades ago. The Rolling Stones have always belonged to Jagger and Richards, something the other long-stayers (second guitarist Wood and slate-faced drummer Charlie Watts, who joined in 1963) have always accepted. But then Jagger, 69, and Richards, 68, are the only remaining original members.

Part of that excitement is ­wondering if one is going to thump the other

David Roberts, editor of Rock Chronicles

A Rolling Stones tour is always an event. Their sell-out stadium gigs raised the bar for every other band in the world and they have always been defined by their live identity. But this, their 41st tour and the highlight of their 50th anniversary year, could be one of their most sensational ever.

David Roberts, editor of Rock Chronicles, a lavish rock history to be published next month (Cassell Illustrated, £25) says: “Their enduring quality is mainly down to the excitement they generate on stage. There is a ­tension-filled chemistry between Mick and Keith that excites people to the point where you are never sure what is going to happen next.

“Part of that excitement is ­wondering if one is going to thump the other.”

The chance to see the Stones ­reunited is such a must-see that tickets are being exchanged for up to £1,000. Throughout much of their career and especially post-1980 the Stones’ success has been based more on sales of tickets than of albums.

“The reason people go is not just to hear the music, it’s to see The Rolling Stones,” says James Medd, rock journalist and music critic, who will be in the audience on ­Sunday night at London’s O2. “Bill Wyman as a bassist may be hugely underrated but the big thrill here is guitarist Mick Taylor, who had a pivotal role on what are considered the Stones’ greatest albums.

“The Rolling Stones were never really as good after he left.”

The reason, says Medd, is the way Taylor and Keith Richards switched between lead and rhythm on a ­single song: Taylor’s fluid, silvery lead guitar spurring on Richards’ long, hypnotic grooves. “It’s a meld. It’s not usual and it is definitely one of the band’s secrets.”

Wyman also has allure beyond his historical involvement. “He may be only a decent bassist – even the band say Darryl Jones, the bassist they’ve got now, is better – but the point with Wyman is that he was actually there from the early days and is part of such iconic tracks as Gimme Shelter, Brown Sugar, Wild Horses and It’s Only Rock 'n’ Roll,” adds Medd.

So why did Wyman and Taylor leave the band and what has ­happened to them since?

“The fact is that none of them have ever been any good away from the group,” says David Roberts, and that includes Sir Mick, who made several disappointing solo albums. “It’s only when they are together as the Stones that they are at the height of their powers.”

Being adored as part of a supergroup may come naturally to Jagger and Richards, both of whom enjoy playing up to their image, but not for Taylor and Wyman.

“Neither of them were cut out to be a Stone,” says David Roberts. “Taylor didn’t see eye to eye with Richards and secondly he didn’t feel comfortable being part of the greatest rock and roll touring band in the world. He was a bit more introverted. He’s a wonderful blues guitarist but he was not made to be a Rolling Stone in the way Ronnie Wood is. Wood is a celebrity figure, although of course he is still only allowed by Richards and Jagger’s strict hierarchy to be a celebrity figure to a point.”

Mick Taylor, who still tours in a blues band from time to time, says he left the Stones following a ­dispute over song-writing credits. Medd believes it is fair to state that being a Rolling Stone ruined ­Taylor’s life.

“He left in part because he was heading for an early death,” claims Medd of Taylor who in time suffered from full-blown heroin addiction. He now lives in a two-bedroom semi in Suffolk, a stark contrast to Mick Jagger’s estimated £200million ­fortune. “Twenty years on, while The Rolling Stones were playing ­Wembley Stadium, Taylor was ­playing blues clubs but perhaps that suited his more introverted nature,” says Medd.

“To survive in The Rolling Stones you have to be one of the boys, as well as a great artist. Or you need to be as ‘Teflon’ as Bill Wyman and Charlie Watts, who were both able to ignore the constant and exhausting tension that comes from being in such a famous band.”

But Taylor insists he is content. “I’m very happy, very relaxed and I’m healthy compared to how I have been,” he said this summer.

As for Bill Wyman, he was older than the other band members, married and had a young son (of whom he was later awarded sole custody). “He was there during the best recording times of the band but eventually they felt he wasn’t quite what they needed,” says Roberts.

“He’s such an anonymous figure. It is difficult to know whether he was pushed or whether he wanted to leave but no one was surprised when he did.”

Wyman certainly had a healthy disinterest in the pharmacological excesses that led other band members to behave like bad boys (although Jagger and Charlie Watts also largely resisted).

Wyman’s weakness was women. Since leaving the band he has done very nicely in a number of alternative arenas. He has written meticulously researched history books, owns a restaurant (Sticky Fingers) and is passionate about interests such as metal detecting, photography and cricket. He has also made a success of his eponymous band Bill Wyman’s Rhythm Kings, with whom he still tours on a modest but successful scale twice a year.

“The years since I left the band have been the best of my life,” says Wyman. “I should have been a museum curator or a librarian because I like that better than being a ‘rock star’. Kids think of the glitz and forget all the hanging around.

“Do you know what the biggest problem is for most musicians on tour? Getting your laundry done.”